https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215264 Rectification under section 254(2) is confined to manifest errors apparent from the record, such as clerical, grammatical, or arithmetical mistakes, and cannot be used to reargue facts, seek review, or obtain fresh adjudication on the merits. The Tribunal treated the plea that affidavits, synopses, factual assertions, and cited decisions were not considered as a request for reappraisal rather than correction of an obvious mistake. On reading the earlier order, it found the dispute had already been decided on merits and that no apparent error justified recall. The Misc. Application was therefore dismissed. en-us Fri, 25 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Jul 2012 07:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215264 Rectification under section 254(2) is confined to manifest errors apparent from the record, such as clerical, grammatical, or arithmetical mistakes, and cannot be used to reargue facts, seek review, or obtain fresh adjudication on the merits. The Tribunal treated the plea that affidavits, synopses, factual assertions, and cited decisions were not considered as a request for reappraisal rather than correction of an obvious mistake. On reading the earlier order, it found the dispute had already been decided on merits and that no apparent error justified recall. The Misc. Application was therefore dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215264